GameStop Listing Hints at High Diablo III Price Tag
- Thread starter Tom Goldman
- Start date
Well, it' TOO early to even be talking about the Diablo III's price. Hell, Starcraft II hasn't been released yet, so meh.
Now assuming that this will be true, then my answer to your issue is simple: We are being treated like cattle, to be milked as much as possible. This will cause a number of PC gamers to delay buying the game till its price falls. Companies want more and more revenue from their current fanbase rather than try to expand their horizons and get more customers.
Now assuming that this will be true, then my answer to your issue is simple: We are being treated like cattle, to be milked as much as possible. This will cause a number of PC gamers to delay buying the game till its price falls. Companies want more and more revenue from their current fanbase rather than try to expand their horizons and get more customers.
Really? That sounds... implausible. I guess I didn't buy it right when it came out, so I don't remember directly, but weren't most PC games still going for $30 in those days? Or they'd just started bumping up towards $50, thanks to the Xbox/GameCube/PS2 era?Tom Goldman said:
Hmmm, too bad I can't think of an easy source for this sort of data at the moment...
Same here. You Americans have it easy. The least I've ever paid for a launch title was about $80, and that was a special deal they were doing. Dragon Age: Origins on PC is currently on sale in EB Games for, oh, about AU$110.jimBOFH said:
Quality costs money. Blizzard spends a lot of time and work making the gameplay rock-solid. If you have a name that warrants quality, and takes the time to continue to live up to it, then I'm perfectly OK with rewarding you by paying a bit more for the goods. Of course Blizzard already has immense income with WoW, but that shouldn't prevent them from cashing in on other titles, if they're as good - it's a free market after all. I'm more worried if it's some retailers trying to bump up prices just because they can though.
Sorry, but I don't buy it. As I said above, this won't be a necessarily good move as customers can potentially wait for the price to drop. The customers could care less about inflation, rising development costs (yeah right!) and any other bullshit that might be raised to defend the product's price. What they care is that this game got more expensive while others have not.Tulisin said:
If Diablo III doesn't prove to be all that much better than its predecessor and ends up having an increased price, then I call bullshit to this.
You do realise that game development prices have, oh, trebled in the last 10 years? And are likely to continue to spiral upwards?stinkychops said:
Being charged more for a good game is not something I will decry.
Being charged more for a -worse- game than the previous is something I can and will rant about for hours on end.
What a huge surprise, not.
Thank god they don't have Gamestops in the UK so I don't have to boycott them.
Thank god they don't have Gamestops in the UK so I don't have to boycott them.
Diablo 3 for $60 is actually a good buy at that price, if it proves to be infinitely replayable like its forebears.Khell_Sennet said:
On topic: I'm willing to bet that most people will just shrug this off if it were only Blizzard. The way I see it, people are up in arms about this because of one reason: Bobby Kotick.
Either way, its still going to be 100 dollars at release here in australia
americans, i hate you all
americans, i hate you all
And even with the price hike it would still be cheaper than a regular PC game in retail in Denmark. I feel it's the wrong way to go, but it's still a bit hard to be sore over it when I pay through my nose as it is. And don't even get me started on the pricing on Steam.
So I guess I'll be buying this in the UK if I buy it. I like the 25-50% lower prices over there.
So I guess I'll be buying this in the UK if I buy it. I like the 25-50% lower prices over there.
Even if it is $60...is that so shocking? High class title from a high quality series from an extremely trustworthy developer.
Yeah, I'm really going to pass that one up just because I need to shell out a fiver more. Blizzard - unlike Activision/Infinity Ward - have enough good karma with me so I wouldn't mind spending an extra few quid on their games because I know beyond a shadow of a doubt that it'll be a good experience.
60$ is a good price for a quality product that I would play for 7+ years. And even for the people that it is two high, it will drop to 40bucks in two years and I can bet it will still be the heavy hitter in its category.
What I don't agree is paying as much for a subpar titles. Especialy those tailored for single player with ambitions of releasing two DLCs a year for additional cash.
What I don't agree is paying as much for a subpar titles. Especialy those tailored for single player with ambitions of releasing two DLCs a year for additional cash.
As long as it is a full game upon release, I'll gladly pay the extra bucks. If I bring it home and see a thing the next day saying "do you want the full game? Pay us more! Sure we developed this at the same time as the rest of the game but we trimmed it down because we want to grab your ankles and shake more money out of you"
I'll pay for extra content, like an expansion pack, but not the day after I bring the main game home. Not that Blizzard is known to do this (LoD was released a year after D2, which is dandy in my books), but it is becoming increasingly apparent in other companies lately.
I'll pay for extra content, like an expansion pack, but not the day after I bring the main game home. Not that Blizzard is known to do this (LoD was released a year after D2, which is dandy in my books), but it is becoming increasingly apparent in other companies lately.
